Ripple CTO emeritus David Schwartz engaged in a public online exchange with a prominent advocate of BIP-110, sparking debate among the cryptocurrency community regarding recent shifts in Bitcoin development and governance.
BLAKE2b hard fork and emerging controversies
The discussion on X (formerly Twitter) began after a user described the adoption of the BLAKE2b mining algorithm as an “attack on BTC,” drawing parallels to previous contentious forks such as Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV. In this case, BLAKE2b refers to an upcoming Bitcoin hard fork supported by developer Luke Dashjr. This project proposes replacing Bitcoin’s traditional SHA-256d mining system with the BLAKE2b algorithm and is scheduled to launch on September 1.
BIP-110 advocate Loogart joined the conversation by questioning the rationale behind labeling the fork as an attack. Loogart argued that forking and choosing a new proof-of-work mechanism was a reaction to disagreements with Bitcoin Core’s direction, stating that this approach allows for voluntary participation and chain selection.
“We objected to the direction Bitcoin Core was taking. They told us to fork. We forked and chose a different PoW. Now we’re building our own chain. And somehow we’re still attacking them.”
Schwartz responded by suggesting that advocacy for alternative chains crosses the line from governance participation to direct opposition, especially when original proposals are not accepted. He stated in a tongue-in-cheek manner that switching from engagement to ‘attack’ occurs when parties refuse to accept the outcome of governance decisions.
ETH
SOL
BSC
ROBINHOOD
USDT
AAPL“You’re not ‘still’ attacking. You switched from participating in governance to attacking when you refused to accept that you lost.”
BIP-110 and the issue of legacy chain ‘fixes’
Loogart replied that supporters did not refuse to accept the result, but rather pursued a new chain after their attempt to update the legacy Bitcoin system failed. He questioned why open dialogue, a soft fork, or further voluntary forks could be construed as attacks when participation is not compulsory.
Schwartz challenged the idea that there was anything to “fix” regarding Bitcoin’s legacy chain, critiquing the assumption that dissenting developers are positioned to unilaterally decide what improvements are needed.
Technical context and recent developments
Bitcoin Knots, a Bitcoin full node client led by Luke Dashjr, is currently attempting a new breakaway chain following the initial BIP-110 effort. The latest fork moves away from Bitcoin’s SHA-256d proof-of-work mechanism, introducing BLAKE2b to avoid reliance on existing Bitcoin miners. As of now, no major exchanges, wallets, or Lightning Network implementations have committed to supporting this proposed fork.
Earlier in August, a group of BIP-110 nodes split off from the main Bitcoin network, creating a minority chain that managed to mine just two blocks in eight hours before stalling. The soft fork proposal had aimed to limit non-financial data on the blockchain, primarily affecting Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes protocols that generate inscriptions, tokens, and arbitrary data payloads.
Mini dictionary: BIP-110, or Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, was an initiative to implement a soft fork restricting block space for non-financial data, especially targeting the rising use of protocols such as Ordinals, BRC-20, and Runes that embed arbitrary data or create tokens outside of Bitcoin’s original transaction model.
The attempted fork failed to gain traction due to low adoption and limited community support, underscoring the complexities and contentious nature of experimentation within the Bitcoin ecosystem.
| Fork/Proposal | Mining Algorithm | Status | Exchange Support |
|---|---|---|---|
| BIP-110 (original) | SHA-256d | Stalled after 2 blocks | None |
| BLAKE2b fork | BLAKE2b | Planned for September 1 | None so far |
